A 
 
 I S C O U R S E, &c. 
 
 
 [PRICE THREE SHI L L I N G S.] 
 
A 
 
 DISCOURSE, 
 
 D E L I V E R E D T O THE 
 
 STUDENTS 
 
 O V T H E 
 
 ROYAL ACADEMY, 
 
 O N T H E 
 
 Diftribution of the Prizes, Dec. loth, 1788, 
 
 B Y T H E 
 
 PRESIDENT. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED BY THOMAS CADELL, PRINTER TO THE 
 ROYALACADEMY. 
 
 M. DCC. LXXXIX. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2016 
 
 https://archive.org/details/discoursedeliver00reyn_1 
 
A 
 
 DISCOURSE, &c. 
 
 GENTLE ME N, 
 
 I 
 
 N the ftudy of our Art, as in the 
 ftudy of all Arts, fomething is 
 
 the refult of our own obfervation of Nature, fomething, 
 (and that is not little) the effect of the example of thofe 
 who have fludied the fame nature before us, and who 
 have cultivated before us the fame Art, with diligence 
 and fuccefs. The lefs we confine ourfelves in the choice 
 of thofe examples, the more advantage we Ifiall derive 
 from them ; and the nearer we fhall bring our perfor- 
 mances to a correfpondence with nature, and the great 
 general rules of Art. When we draw our examples, 
 from remote and revered antiquity, (with fome ad- 
 vantage undoubtedly in that feledlion) we fubjedt our- 
 felves to fome inconveniencies. We may fuffer ourfelves 
 to be too much led away by great names, and be too 
 much fubdued by overbearing authority. Our learning, 
 in that cale, is not fo much an exercife of our judgment 
 
 B 
 
 as 
 
[ ^ ] 
 
 as a proof of our docility. We find ourfelves, perhaps^ 
 too much overfhadowed ; and the character of our 
 purfuits is rather diflinguiflied by the tamenefs of the 
 follower, than animated by the fpirit of emulation. It 
 is fometimes of lervice, that our examples fhould be 
 near us ; and fuch as raife a reverence, fufficient to 
 induce us carefully to obferve them, yet not fo great 
 as to prevent us from engaging with them in fomething 
 like a generous contention. 
 
 We have lately loft Mr. Gainfborough, one of the 
 greateft ornaments of our Academy. It is not our 
 buftnefs here, to make panegyrics on the living, or even 
 on the dead, who were of our body The praife of the 
 former might bear the appearance of adulation ; and 
 the latter of untimely juftice ; perhaps of envy to thofe 
 whom we have ftill the happinefs to enjoy, by an ob- 
 lique fuggeftion of invidious comparifons. In difcourftng 
 therefore on the talents of the late Mr. Gainfborough, 
 my objedl is, not fo much to praife or to blame him, as 
 to draw from his excellencies and defeds, matter of in- 
 ftrudion to the Students in our Academy. If ever this 
 nation fhould produce genius fufficient to acquire to us 
 the honourable diftinclion of an Engliffi School ; the 
 name of Gainfborough will be tranfmitted to pofterity, 
 in the hiftory of the Art, among the very firft of that 
 
[ 3 3 
 
 riling name. That our reputation in the Arts is now 
 onlj riling, mull: be acknowledged ; and we muH expert 
 our advances to be attended with old prejudices, as ad- 
 verfaries, and not as fupporters ; Handing in this refpedt 
 in a very different lituation from the late artifts of the 
 Roman School, to whofe reputation ancient prejudices have 
 certainly contributed : the way was prepared, for them,, 
 and they may be faid rather to have lived in the reputation 
 of their country, than to have contributed to it ; whilft 
 whatever celebrity is obtained by Englilh Artifts, can arife 
 only from the operation of a fair and true comparifon. 
 And when they communicate to their country a fhare 
 of their reputation, it is a portion of fame not borrowed 
 from others, but folely acquired by their own labour and 
 talents. As Italy has undoubtedly a prefcriptive right to 
 an admiration bordering on prejudice, as a foil peculiarly 
 adapted, congenial, and, we may add, deftined to the 
 production of men of great genius in our Art, we may 
 not unreafonably fufpeft that a portion of the great fame 
 of fome of their late artifts has been owing to the general 
 readincis and difpolition of mankind, to acquiefce in 
 their original prepoffeffions in favour of the produdiions 
 of the Roman SchooL 
 
 On 
 
[ 4 ] 
 
 On this ground, however unfafe, I will venture to 
 prophecy, that two of the laft diftinguifhed Painters of 
 that country, I mean Pompeio Battoni, and Rafaelle 
 Mengs, however great their names may at prefent found 
 in our ears, will very foon fall into the rank of Impe- 
 riale, Sebaftian Concha, Placido Conftanza, Maffuccio, 
 and the reft of their immediate predeceffors, whofe names, 
 though equally renowned in their lifetime, are now fal- 
 len into what is little fhort of total oblivion. I do 
 not fay that thofe painters were not fuperior to the 
 artift I allude to, and whofe lofs we lament, in a cer- 
 tain routine of pra£lice, which, to the eyes of com- 
 mon obfervers, has the air of a learned compofttion, and 
 bears a fort of fuperficial refemblance to the manner of 
 the great men who went before them. 1 know this per- 
 fectly well, but I know likewife, that a man, looking 
 for real and lafting reputation, muft unlearn much of 
 the common-place method, fo obfervable in the works 
 of the artifts whom I have named. For my own part, I 
 confefs, I take more intereft in, and am more captivated 
 with, the powerful impreffion of nature, which Gainfbo- 
 rough exhibited in his portraits, and in his landikips, and 
 the interefting ftmplicky and elegance of his little ordi- 
 nary beggar children, than with any of the works of that 
 School, hnce the time of Andrea Sacchi, or perhaps, we 
 
 may 
 
C s ] 
 
 may fay of Carlo Maratti, two painters who may truly 
 be faid to be Ultimi Romanorum. 
 
 I AM well aware how much I lay myfelf open to the 
 cenfure and ridicule of the academical profeffors of other 
 nations, in preferring the humble attempts of Gainfbo- 
 rough to the works of thofe regular graduates in the great 
 hiftoricai fHle. But we have the fandlion of all man- 
 kind in preferring genius in a lower rank of art, to feebie- 
 nefs and inlipidity in the higheft. 
 
 It would not be to the prefent purpofe, even if I had 
 the means and materials, which I have not, to enter into 
 the private life of Mr. Gainfborough. The hiftory of 
 his gradual advancement, and the means by which he 
 acquired fuch excellence in his art, would come nearer 
 to our purpofe and wiflies, if it were by any means at- 
 tainable; but the flow progrefs of advancement is in 
 general, imperceptible to the man himfelf who makes it; 
 it is the confequence of an accumulation of various ideas, 
 which his mind has received, he does not, perhaps, 
 know how or when. Sometimes indeed it happens, 
 that he may be able to mark the time, when from the 
 light of a pidure, a palTage in an author, or a hint 
 in converfation, he has received, as it were, fome new 
 
 C and 
 
C 6 } 
 
 and guiding light, fomething like infpiration, by which 
 his mind has been expanded, and is morally fure that 
 his whole life and conduct has been alFedled by that 
 accidental circumftance. Such interefting accounts we 
 may however fometimes obtain from a man, who has 
 acquired an uncommon habit of felf-examination, and 
 has attended to the progrefs of his own improvement. 
 
 It may not be improper to make mention of fome 
 of the cuftoms and habits of this extraordinary man ; 
 points which come more within the reach of an obferver ; 
 I however mean fuch only as are conneifted with his art,, 
 and indeed were, as I apprehend, the caivfes of his arriving 
 to that high degree of excellence, which we fee and ac- 
 knowledge in his works. Of thefe caufes we muft ftate, as 
 the fundamental, the love which he had to his art ; to 
 which, indeed, his whole mind appears to have been de- 
 voted, and to which every thing he faw was referred ; and 
 this we may fairly conclude from various circumftances of 
 his life which were known to his intimate friends. Among: 
 others he had a habit of continually remarking to thofe 
 who happened to be about him, whatever peculiarity of 
 countenance, whatever accidental combination of figures,, 
 or happy effedls of light and fhadow occurred in prof- 
 pe£ts, in the fky, in walking the fireets, or in company. 
 
 If. 
 
[ 7 ] 
 
 If, in his walks, he found a charadler that he liked, 
 and whofe attendance was to be obtained, he ordered him 
 to his houfe ; and from the fields he brought into his 
 painting-room, flumps of trees, weeds, and animals of 
 yarious kinds, and defigned them, not from memory, but 
 immediately from the objects. He even framed a kind 
 of models of landfkips, on his table, compofed of broken 
 flones, dryed herbs, and pieces of looking glals, which 
 he magnified and improved into rocks, trees, and water. 
 How far this latter pradlice may be ufeful in giving 
 hints, the profeflbrs of landfkip can beft determine. 
 Like every other technical praftice, it feems to me wholly 
 to depend on the general talent of him who ufes it. 
 Such methods may be nothing better than contemptible 
 and mifchievous trifling; or they may be aids. I think 
 upon the whole, unlefs we conflantly refer to real na- 
 ture, that practice may be more likely to do harm than 
 good. I mention it only, as it fhews the folicitude and, 
 extreme activity which he had about every thing that re- 
 lated to his art ; that he wiflied to have his objeds em- 
 bodied as it were, and diflindly before him, that he. 
 negleded nothing which could keep his faculties in 
 exercife, and derived hints from eveiv fort of com- 
 bination. 
 
 We 
 
C S ] 
 
 V/e imifl; not forget, whilfi; we are on this fut^ed, to 
 make fome remarks on his cuftom of painting by night, 
 which confirms what I have already mentioned, his 
 great affecftion to his art ; fince he could not amufe him- 
 felf in the evenings, by any other means fo agreeable to 
 himfelf. I am indeed mueh inclined to believe that it is 
 a pradtice very advantageous and improving to an artift ; 
 for by this means he will acquire a new and a higher 
 perception of v/hat is great and beautiful in Nature. By 
 candle-light, objects not only appear more beautiful, but 
 from their being in a-greater breadth of light and Ihadow, 
 as well as having a greater breadth and uniformity of co- 
 lour, nature appears to me in a higher ftile ; and even 
 the fiefii feems to take a higher and richer tone of colour. 
 Judgment is to diredl us in the ufe to be made of this 
 method of fiudy ; but the method itfelf is (I am very fure 
 of it) advantageous. I have often imagined that the two 
 great colourifts, Titian and Corregio, (though I do not 
 know that they painted by night) formed their high ideas 
 of colouring from the effedts of objedls by this artificial 
 light : but I am more affured, that whoever attentively 
 fiudies, the firft and belt manner of Guercino, will be 
 convinced that he either painted by this light, or formed 
 Jiis manner on this conception. 
 
 Another 
 
[ 9 ] 
 
 Another pradice Gainlborough had, ''which is worth 
 mentioning, as it is certainly worthy of imitation ; I 
 mean his manner of forming all the parts of his pidure 
 together the whole going on at the fame time, in the 
 lame manner as nature creates her works. Though this 
 method is not uncommon to thofe who have been regular- 
 ly educated, yet probably it was fuggefted to him, by his 
 own natural fagacity„ That this cuflom is not univerfal 
 appears from the pradice of the painter whom I juft now 
 mentioned, Pompeio Batoni, who finillied his hiftorical 
 pidures part after part ; and in his portraits completely 
 finifhed one feature before he proceeded to another. 
 The confequence was, as might be expeded ; the coun- 
 tenance was never well exprefled ; and, as the painters 
 fey, the whole not well put together. 
 
 The firft thing required to excel in our Art, or I be.- 
 lieve in any art, is, not only a love for it, but even an 
 enthufiaftic ambition to excel in it. This never fails of 
 fticcefs proportioned to the natural abilities with which 
 the artift has been endowed by Providence.. Of Gainf- 
 borough, we certainly know, that his paflion was not 
 the acquirement of riches, but excellence in his art; 
 and to enjoy that honourable fame which is fure to at- 
 tend it. — That he felt this ruling fajfon firong in death^. 
 
 D I am; 
 
[ 10 1 
 
 I am myfeif a witnefs. A few days before he died he 
 wrote me a letter, to exprefs his acknowledgements for 
 the good opinion I entertained of his abilities, and the 
 manner in which (he had been informed) I always fpoke 
 of him, and defired he might fee me, once more, before 
 he died. I am aware how flattering it is to myfeif to be 
 thus eonnedfed with the dying teftimony which this ex^ 
 celient painter bore to his art. But I cannot prevail oa 
 myfeif to fupprefs that I was not connected with him by 
 any habits of familiarity ; if any little jealoufies had 
 fubflfled between us they were forgotten, in thofe mo- 
 ments of flncerity ; and he turned towards me as one, 
 who was engrofled by the fame purfuits, and who deferv- 
 ed his good opinion, by being fenflble of his excellence. 
 Without entering into a detail of what palled at this lafl: 
 interview, the imprefllon of it upon my mind was, that his 
 regret at lofing life, was principally the regret of leaving 
 his art ; and more efpecially as he now began, he faid, 
 to fee what his deficiencies were; which, he faid, he 
 flattered himfelf in his lafl: works were fupplied. 
 
 When fuch a man as Gainfborough arrives to great 
 fame, without the afliftance of an academical education, 
 without travelling to Italy, or any of thofe preparatory flu- 
 dies which have been fo often recommended, he is pro- 
 duced 
 
[ ” ] 
 
 duced as an inftance, how little fuch lludies are necef- 
 lary; iince fo great excellence may be acquired without 
 them. This is an inference not warranted by the fuccefs 
 of any individual ; and I truft it will not be thought 
 that I wifh to make this ufe of it. 
 
 It muft be remembered that the ftyle and department 
 of art which Gainlborough chofe, and in which he fo 
 much excelled, did not require that he Ihould go out of 
 his own country for the objedls of his ftudy ; they were 
 every where about him ; he found them in the flreets, 
 and in the fields ; and from the models thus accidentally 
 found, he feledcd with great judgment, fuch as fuited 
 his purpofe. As his ftudies were direded to the living 
 v/orld principally, he did not pay a general attention to 
 the works of the various mafters, though they are, in 
 my opinion, always of great ufe, even when the cha- 
 rader of our fubjed requires us to depart from fome of 
 their principles. It cannot be denied that the depart- 
 ment of the art which he profeffed may exifl v/ith great 
 .elfed without them; that in fuch fubjeds, and in the man- 
 ner that belongs to them, they are fupplied, and more 
 than fupplied, by natural fagacity, and a minute obfer- 
 vation cf particular nature. If Gainfborough did not 
 look at nature, with a poet’s eye, it muft be acknow- 
 ledged 
 
[ la ] 
 
 ledged that he faw her with the eye of a painter; andi 
 gave a faithful, if not a poetical reprefentation of what 
 he had before him. 
 
 Though he did not much attend to the works of the 
 great hiftorical painters of former ages, yet he was well 
 aware, that the language of the art, the art of imitation, 
 muft be learned fomewhere ; and as he knew that he could 
 not learn it in an equal degree from his cotemporaries,, 
 he very judicioudy applied himfelf to the Flemifh School ; 
 who are undoubtedly the greateft mailers of one neceffary 
 branch of art; and he did not need to go out of his own 
 country for examples of that fchool: From that he learnt 
 the harmony of colouring, the management and difpoli- 
 tion of light and Ihadow, and every means which the maf- 
 ters of it pra£tifed to ornament, and give fplendor to their 
 works. And to fatisfy himfelf as well as others, how well 
 he knew the mechanifm and artifice which they employed 
 to bring out that tone of colour, which we fo much ad- 
 mire in their works, he occafionally made copies fromi 
 Rubens, Teniers, and Vandyck, which it would be no 
 difgrace to the moft accurate connoiffeur to miftake, at 
 the firft fight, for the Works of thofe mailers. What he 
 he thus learned, he applied to the originals of nature,, 
 
 which. 
 
[ 13 ] 
 
 v/hicli he faw with his own eyes ; and imitated, not in. 
 the manner of thofe mafters, but in his own. 
 
 Whether he moft excelled in portraits, landlkips, or 
 fancy pic3;ures, it is difficult to determine : whether his 
 portraits were mod: admirable for exa£t truth of refem- 
 blance, or his landfkips for the portrait-like reprefentation 
 of nature, fuch as we fee in the works of R ubens, Ryfdale, 
 and others of thofe Schools. In his fancy pidtures, 
 when he had fixed on his objedt of imitation, whether 
 it was the mean and vulgar form of a wood-cutter, or a 
 child of an interefcing charadler, as he did not attempt 
 to raife the one, fo neither did he lofe any of the natural 
 grace and elegance of the other j fuch a grace, and fuch an 
 elegance as are more frequently found in cottages than in 
 courts. This excellence was his own, the refult of his par- 
 ticular obfervation and tafte ; for this he was certainly 
 not indebted to the Flemiffi School ; nor indeed to any 
 School ; for his grace was not academical, or antique, 
 but feledled by himfelf from the great fchool of nature ; 
 and there are yet a thoufand modes of grace, which are 
 neither theirs nor his, but lie open in the multiplied 
 feenes and figures of life, to be brought out by Ikilful 
 and faithful obfervers. 
 
 E 
 
 Upon 
 
C *4 1 
 
 Upon the whole, we may juftly fay, that whatever he 
 attempted he carried to a high degree of excellence. It 
 is to the credit of his good fenfe and judgment that he 
 never did attempt that ftile of hiftorical painting, for 
 which his previous ftudies had made no preparation. 
 
 And here it naturally occurs to oppofe the fenhble 
 condudl of Gainfborough in this refpeft, to that of oui 
 late excellent Hogarth, who, with all his extraordinary 
 talents, was not bleffed with this knowledge of his own 
 deficiency 5 or of the bounds which were fet to the ex- 
 tent of his own powers. After this admirable artifi: had 
 Ipent the greatefi: part of his life, in an active, bufy, and 
 we may add, fuccefsful attention to the ridicule of life; 
 after he had invented a new fpecies of dramatic painting, 
 in which probably he will never be equalled, and had 
 llored his mind with fuch infinite materials to explain 
 and illuftrate the domefiic and familiar fcenes of com- 
 mon life, which were generally (and ought to have been, 
 always) the fubjed of his pencil ; he very imprudently,, 
 or rather prefu m ptu oufly , attempted the great hifiori- 
 cal ftyle ; for which his previous habits had by no means 
 prepared him : he was indeed fo entirely unacquainted 
 with the principles of this fiyle, that he was not even 
 
 aware. 
 
C IS ] 
 
 aware, that any artificial preparation, was at all necefi- 
 fary. It is to be regretted, that any part of the life of 
 fuch a genius fhould be fruitlefsly employed. Let his 
 failure teach us not to indulge ourfelves in the vain ima- 
 gination, that by a momentary refolution we can give 
 either dexterity to the hand, or a new habit to the 
 mind. 
 
 I HAVE however little doubt, but that the fame fagacity,, 
 which enabled thofe two extraordinary men, to difcover 
 the true objeft, aiid. the peculiar excellence of that 
 branch of art which they cultivated, would have been: 
 equally efiedtual in difcovering the principles of the high- 
 er ftyle; if they had invefiigated thofe principles with the 
 fame eager induilry, which they exerted in their own de- 
 partment. As Gainfborough never attempted the heroic 
 fiile, fo neither did he deftroy the charafter and uniformity 
 of his own ftile, by the idle afFedlation of introducing 
 mythological learning in any of his pidlures. Of this boy- 
 ifli folly, we fee infiances enough, even in the works of 
 great painters. When the Dutch School attempt this 
 poetry of our art in their landfkips, their performances 
 are beneath criticifm; they become only an objed of 
 laughter. This pradice is hardly excufeable, even in- 
 
 Claude 
 
[ i6 ] 
 
 Claude Loiraiii, who had fhewn more difcretion if he 
 had never meddled with fuch fubjefts. 
 
 Our late ingenious acadamician Wilfon, has I fear, 
 ■been guilty, like many of his predeceffors, of introducing 
 gods and goddefles, ideal beings, into fcenes which were 
 by no means prepared to receive fuch perfonages. His 
 landlkips were, in reality too near common nature to ad- 
 mit fupernatural objeds. In confequence of thismifi:ake,in 
 a very admirable pidure of a ftorm, which I have feen of 
 his hand, many figures are introduced in the fore ground, 
 fome in apparent diflrefs., and fome ftruck dead, as a fpec- 
 tator would naturally fuppofe, by the lightning ; had 
 not the painter, injudicioufly (as I think] rather chofen 
 that their death fhould be imputed to a little Apollo, 
 who appears in the fky, with his bent bow, and that 
 thofe figures fhould be confidered as the children of 
 Niobe. 
 
 To manage a fubjed of this kind, a peculiar flile of 
 art is required; and it can only be done without im- 
 propriety, or even without ridicule, when we adapt the 
 charader of the landfkip, and that too, in all its parts, to 
 the hiftorical or poetical reprefentation. This is a very 
 
 difficult 
 
C 17 ] 
 
 difficult adventure, and it requires a mind, thrown back 
 two thoufand years, and as it were naturalized in an- 
 tiquity, like that of Nicolo Pouffin, to atchieve it. In 
 the pidture alluded to, the firft idea that prefents itfelf,, 
 is' that of Wonder, at feeing a figure in fo xmcoinmon. 
 a fitiiation as that of the Apollo is placed, for the clduds 
 on ' which he kneels, have not the appearance of being 
 able to fupport him j they have neither the fubftance nor 
 the form, fit for the receptacle of a human figure, and 
 they do not pofiefs in any refpeft that romantic charadler 
 which is appropriated to fuch a fubjedl, and which alone 
 can harmonize witli poetical ftories. 
 
 It appears to me, that fuch condudl is no lefs abfurd 
 than if a plain man, giving a relation of a real diftrefs, 
 occafioned by an inundation, accompanied with thunder 
 and lightening, fhould, inflead of fimply relating the 
 event, take- it into his head, in order to give a grace to 
 his narration, to talk of Jupiter and his thunder-bolts, 
 or any other- figurative idea; an intermixture which 
 (though in poetry, with its proper preparations and ac- 
 Gompanimentsj it might be managed with effedi) yet in the 
 in'ftance before us would counteradl the purpofe of the 
 narrator, and inflead of being in terefting, would be only 
 ridiculous. 
 
 F 
 
 The 
 
I '8 ] 
 
 The Dutch and Flemiili flyle of landikip, not even 
 excepting thofe of Rubens, is unfit for poetical fubjeds; 
 but to explain in what this inaptitude confifts, or to point 
 out all the cireumftances that give noblenefs, grandeur, 
 and the poetic charadter to ftile, in landikip, would re- 
 quire a long difcourfe of itfelf; and the end would be 
 then perhaps but imperfectly attained. The painter who 
 is ambitious of this perilous excellence, muft catch his in- 
 fpiration from thofie who have cultivated with fuccefs the 
 poetry, as it may be called, of the art, and they are few 
 .indeed. 
 
 I CANNOT quit this fubje<9; without mentioning two 
 examples which occur to me at prefent, in which the 
 poetical fiile of landikip may be feen happily executed ; 
 the one is Jacob’s dream by Salvator Rofa, and the other 
 the journey of the arc, by Sebaftian Bourdon. With 
 whatever dignity thofe hiftories are prefented to us in the 
 language of Scripture, this flile of painting pofleffes the 
 fame power of infpiring fentiments of grandeur and fubli- 
 mity, and is able to communicate them to fubjefts which 
 appear by no means adapted to receive them. — A ladder 
 againft the sky has no very promifing appearance of 
 poffeffing a capacity to excite any heroic ideas ; and the 
 arc, in the hands of a lecond-rate rnafter, would have 
 
 little 
 
[ 19 ] 
 
 IHtle more effect than a common waggon on the high'- 
 way ; yet thofe fobjeds are fo poetically treated through- 
 out, the parts have been fuch a correfpondencc with each 
 other, and the whole and every part of the fcene is fo 
 vihonary, that it is impofllble to look at them, without 
 feeling, in fome meafure, the enthuhafm W'hich feems 
 to have infpired the painterso 
 
 By Continual contemplation of fuch works, a fenfe ofthe 
 higher excellencies of art will by degrees dawn on the 
 imagination ; at every review that fenfe will become more 
 and more affured, until we come to enjoy a fober cer- 
 tainty of the real exigence (if I may fo exprefs rayfelf) of 
 thofe almoft ideal beauties ; and the artift will then find 
 no difficulty of fixing in his mind the principles by which 
 the impreffion is produced; which he will feel and prac- 
 tice, though they are perhaps too delicate and refined, 
 and too peculiar to the imitative art, to be conveyed to 
 the mind by any other means. 
 
 To return to Gainlborough : the peculiarity of his 
 manner, or ftile, or we may call it the language in which 
 he exprefled his ideas, has been confidered by many, as 
 his greatefi; defed. But without altogether wiffiing to 
 €nter into the difcuffion whether a defed or not, inter- 
 
 mixed 
 
[ 3 
 
 mixed as it was, with great beauties, of fome of whieh 
 it was probably the caufe, it becomes a proper fubje6t 
 of criticifm and difcuffion to a painter. 
 
 A NOVELTY and peculiarity of manner, as it is often- 
 a Caufe- of our approbation, fo likewife it is often a 
 ground of cenfure; as being contrary to the practice of; 
 other painters, in whofe manner we have been initiated,, 
 and in whofe favour we have perhaps been prepoffeffed 
 from our infancy ; for, fond as we are of novelty, we are 
 upon the whole creatures of habit. However, it is 
 certain, that all thofe odd fcratches and marks, which,, 
 on a clofe examination, are fo obfervable in Gainlbo- 
 lough’s pictures, and which even to experienced painters 
 appear rather the eife<£t of accident than defign; this 
 chaos, this uncouth and fhapelefs appearance, at a cer- 
 tain diftance, by a kind of magic, affumes form ; and all 
 the parts feem to drop into their proper places ; fo that 
 we can hardly refufe acknowledging the full effect of di- 
 ligence, under the appearance of chance and hafty 
 negligence. That Gainfborough himfelf confldered this 
 peculiarity in his manner and the power it poiTeffes of 
 exciting furprife, as a beauty in his works, I think may 
 be inferred from the eager defire, which we know, he 
 always exprefled that his pictures, at the exhibition, 
 fliould be feen near, as well as at a diftance. 
 
 The 
 
C » ] 
 
 The flightnefs which we fee in his befl: works, can- 
 not always be imputed to negligence. However they 
 may appear to fuperficial obfervers, painters know very 
 well that a fteady attention to the general elFed:, takes 
 up more time, and is much more laborious to the mind, 
 than any mode of high finilhing or fmoothnefs, without 
 fueh attention. His handlifig, the manner of leaving the 
 colours, or in other words, the methods he ufcd for pro- 
 ducing the effect, had very much the appearance of the 
 Work of an artifl: who had never learnt from others the 
 ufual and regular pradtice belonging to the art; but ftills 
 like a man of ftrong intuitive perception of what was re- 
 quired, he found out a way of his own to accomplifh his 
 purpofe. 
 
 It is no diigrace to the genius of Gainlborough, to 
 compare him to fuch men as we fometimes meet with,,, 
 whofe natural eloquence appears even in fpeaking a lan- 
 guage, which they can fcarce be faid to underdand, and 
 who, without knowing the appropriate exprelTion of al- 
 moft any one idea, contrive to communicate the lively 
 and forcible impreffions of an energetic mind. 
 
 I THINK fome apology may reafonably be made 
 for His manner, without violating truth, or running 
 
 Q' anvr 
 
any rifkof poifoning the minds of the younger fludents, 
 by propagating falfe criticifm, for the fake of raifing the 
 charadler of a favorite artifl. It muft be allowed that 
 this hatching manner of Gainlhorough, did very much, 
 contribute to the lightnefs of effeA which is fo eminent 
 a beauty in his pi£tures ; as on the contrary, much fmooth- 
 nefs, and uniting the colours, is apt to produce heavi- 
 uefs. Every artifl mull have remarked, how often that 
 lightnefs of hand, which was in his dead-colour, or firfl 
 painting, elcaped in the finifhing-, when he had deter- 
 mined the parts with more preciflon ; and another iofs 
 he often experiences, which is of greater confequence j 
 whilfl he is employed in the detail, the effedl of the 
 whole together, is either forgot or negledled. The like- 
 nefs of a portrait, for inflance, confifls more in preferv- 
 ing the general effedl of the countenance, than in the mod 
 minute finidiing of the features, or any of the particular 
 parts. Now Gainfborough’s portraits were often little more, 
 in regard to £nifliit>g, or determining the forms of the fea- 
 tures, than what generally attends a dead colour; but as 
 he was always attentive to the general effedl, or whole to- 
 gether, I have often imagined that this unfinidied man- 
 met, contributed even to that driking refemblance for 
 which his portraits are fo remarkable. Though this 
 
 opinion 
 
[ ^3 ] 
 
 opinion may be confidered as fanciful, yet I think a plan- 
 £ble reafon may be given, why fuch a mode of painting 
 fliould have fuch an eife^t. It is prefuppofed that in this 
 •undetermined manner, there is the general effed; enough 
 to remind the fpedrator of the original ; the imagination 
 fupplies the reft, and perhaps more fatisfaftory to himfelf 
 if not more exadtly than the artift, with all his care, 
 could have pofllbly done. At the fame time it muft be 
 acknowledged there is one evil attending this mode; 
 that if the portrait were feen, previous to any knowledge 
 of the original, different people would form different 
 ideas, and all would be difappointed at not finding the 
 original correfpond to their own conception ; under the 
 great latitude which indiftindnefs gives to the imagina- 
 tion, to affume almoft what charader or form it pleafes. 
 
 Every artift has fome favorite part on which he fixes 
 his attention, and which he purfues with fuch eagernefs, 
 that it abforbs every other confideration; and he often 
 falls into the oppofite error of that which he would avoid, 
 which is always ready to receive him. Now Gainfbo- 
 rough having truly a painter’s eye for colouring, culti- 
 vated thofe effeds of the art which proceed from co- 
 lours, and fometimes appears to be indifferent to or to 
 
 negled 
 
C 24 J 
 
 neglect other excellencies. Whatever defeds are ac« 
 knowledged, let him Hill experience from us the farne 
 candour that we fo freely give upon fimilar occafions 
 to the ancient mafters ; let us not encourage that faf- 
 tidious difpofition, which is difcontented with every 
 thing Ihort of perfedion, and unreafonably require, 
 as we fometimes do, a union of excellencies, not perhaps 
 quite compatible with each other. — We may, on this 
 ground, fay even of the divine Raifaele, that he might 
 have finilhed his pidure as highly and as eorredly as 
 was his cuftom, without heavinefs 6f manner 5 and that 
 Pouffine might have preferved all his precifion without 
 hardnefs or drynefs. 
 
 To {hew the difficulty of uniting folidity with light- 
 nefs of manner, we may produce a pidure of Rubens in 
 the Church of S. Judule, at BruHels, as an example; the 
 fubjed is, Chri/l's charge to Peter ^ which, as it is the 
 higheh, and fmootheft, hniilaed pidure I remember to 
 have feen of that mafter, fo it is by far the heavieil ; and' 
 if I had found it in any other place, I {liouid have 
 fufpeded it to be a copy ; for painters know very well, 
 that it is principally by this air of facility, or the want 
 of it, that originals are diftinguifhed from copies. — A 
 
 lightnefa 
 
[ 25 ] 
 
 lightnefs of produced by colour, and that produ- 
 
 ced by facility of handling, are generally united; a copy 
 may preferve fomething of the one, it is true, but hardly 
 ever of the other; a connoifleur therefore finds it often 
 necefiary to look carefully into the pidfure before he de- 
 termines on its originality. 
 
 Gainsborough poflefied this quality of lightnefs of 
 manner and effedl, I think, to an unexampled excellence ; 
 but, it muft be acknowledged, at the fame time, that 
 the facrifice which he made to this ornament of our art, 
 was too great ; it^ was'in reality, preferring the lefTer ex- 
 cellencies to the greater. To conclude. However, we 
 may apologize for the deficiencies of Gainjboroughy 
 (I mean particularly his want of precifion and finifh- 
 ing) who fo ingenioufly contrived to cover his defedls 
 by his beauties; and who cultivated that department 
 of art, where fuch defeds are more eafily excufed; 
 you are to remember, that no apology can be made 
 for this deficiency, in that ftile which this academy 
 teaches, and which ought to be the objed of your pur- 
 fuit; it will be necefiary for you, in the firfi; place, 
 never to lofe fight of the great rules and principles of the 
 art, as they are colleded from the full body of the befi: 
 
 H general 
 
[ 26 ] 
 
 general pradices, and the moft conftant and uniforaj 
 experience; this muft be the ground work of all your 
 ftudies ; afterwards you may profit, as in this cafe I 
 wifh you to profit, by the peculiar experience, and per- 
 fonal talents of artifts living and dead ; you may derive 
 lights, and catch hints from their pradice ; but the mo- 
 ment you turn them into models, you fall infinitely be- 
 low them ; you may be corrupted by excellencies, not fo 
 much belonging to the art as perfonal and appropriated 
 to the artift, and you become bad copies of good paiur 
 ters, inftead of excellent imitators of the great univetfal 
 truth of things. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
tc /z/ 
 
 SP^L n-B